A note on Carl Jung’s refusal to commit a fashionable stupidity

For many years, the banner of the Society for Psychical Research’s website displayed a quotation by Carl Jung: “I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud.”  Although no reference was provided, it was a natural assumption that it came from an SPR publication.  Numerous online sources attribute it to a paper he delivered to the SPR in 1919 which was printed as ‘The Psychological Foundations of Belief in Spirits’.  Jung did give an address to the SPR under that title.  The Council report in the October 1919 issue of the SPR’s Journal recorded that:

“The 159th General Meeting of the Society was held in the Robert Barnes Hall of the Royal Society of Medicine, 1 Wimpole Street, London, W., on Friday, July 4th, 1919, at 5.30 p.m.; DR. T. W. MITCHELL in the chair.

“Dr. C. G. JUNG (of Zürich) read a paper on ‘The Psychological Foundations of the Belief in Spirits’, which, it is hoped, will be published later in the Proceedings.”

When it appeared in Part 79 of Proceedings in May 1920, the title had been slightly amended to ‘The Psychological Foundations of Belief in Spirits’, rather than ‘the belief’.  The words “I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud,” though, do not appear in that text, or indeed anywhere in the SPR’s Proceedings or Journal.  In fact, its only appearance in the Lexscien online library, which contains the publications of other organisations in addition to the SPR’s, is in a 1999 Journal of Scientific Exploration article by Ivor Grattan-Guinness, citing “Collected Works, Vol. 8, 317” as the source.

A glance at Volume 8 of Jung’s Collected Works, readily available in an online edition, reveals the quotation in an essay bearing the same title as that found in the SPR’s Proceedings.  However, the Collected Works essay shows marked differences to the version in Proceedings.  Fortunately, it also appears in a 2008 compilation of Jung’s writings on the paranormal, Psychology and the Occult, and the editors shed valuable light on the evolution of the paper:

“Originally translated by H. G. Baynes from a German manuscript and published in Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research (London), XXXI (1920), having been read at a general meeting of the Society on July 4, 1919. This translation was republished in Contributions to Analytical Psychology (London and New York, 1928). The German original was first published as ‘Die psychologischen Grundlagen des Geisterglaubens’, in Uber die Energetik der Seek (Psychologische Abhandlungen, II; Zürich, 1928), and was revised and expanded in Uber psychische Energetik und das Wesen der Traume (Zürich, 1948). The latter version is here translated, but the Baynes translation has also been consulted.—EDITORS.”

The translation matches that in the Collected Works, as the acknowledgements state: “‘The Psychological Foundations of Belief in Spirits’ and ‘The Soul and Death’ extracted from Volume 8, The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, 2nd edn © 1969 by Princeton University Press.”  The lengthy paragraph containing the “fashionable stupidity” sentence has a footnote indicating the bulk of it was added to the 1948 edition, and the sentence is part of the new material.  It is therefore incorrect to say it was included in Jung’s address to the SPR; it only appeared in the expanded 1948 version.

This issue has cropped up a number of times in enquiries sent to the SPR.   Unsurprisingly, confusion occurs when those consulting its Proceedings cannot locate the quotation.  For those puzzled by the omission in Jung’s SPR paper, I hope this note will help.

The remaining puzzle is why this particular sentence appeared so prominently on the SPR website for so long.  It was a reductive characterisation even in 1919, and psychology has advanced considerably since then.  There can have been few people in recent years, however fierce their scepticism, prepared to argue that all phenomena they cannot explain must be fraudulent.  Its continued presence on the website was unnecessary; worse, it felt defensive.

One obvious explanation for its inclusion is that it highlighted the fact that such an eminent figure was connected to the SPR (Jung had joined in 1917), and having his name displayed so prominently bolstered the Society’s credentials.  Perhaps so, but it would have been preferable to have used a more positive sentence, and one actually present in the SPR’s publications, thereby avoiding subsequent head-scratching.

 

References

Grattan-Guinness, I. (1999) ‘Real communication? Report on a SORRAT letter-writing experiment’, Journal of Scientific Exploration, 13(2), pp. 231–256.

Journal of the Society for Psychical Research (1919) ‘General meeting’, 19(358), October, p. 95.

Jung, C.G. (1921) ‘The psychological foundations of belief in spirits’, Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 31 (Part 79, May 1920), pp. 75–93.

Jung, C.G. (1948) ‘Die psychologischen Grundlagen des Geisterglaubens’, in Über psychische Energetik und das Wesen der Träume. Zürich: Rascher.

Jung, C.G. (1969) ‘The psychological foundations of belief in spirits’, in Adler, G. and Hull, R.F.C. (eds.) The collected works of C.G. Jung, Volume 8: The structure and dynamics of the psyche. 2nd edn. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 390–411.

Jung, C.G. (2008) ‘The psychological foundations of belief in spirits’, in Psychology and the occult. London: Routledge, pp. 128–149.

 

The portrait is an AI-generated depiction of what Jung looked like in 1919.

 

Enid Brockies - Countess Hélène Magriska

Sunderland Echo, 4 December 1933

Enid Florence Brockies (1911-1943) was a well-known author in her time, under the flamboyant pen name Countess Hélène Magriska.  My interest stems from a family connection: she was my first cousin once removed.  Henry James Lockhart (1861-1905), the well-known elephant trainer, was her grandfather and my great-grandfather.  Despite her short life she was a prolific novelist of romantic melodramas, usually with foreign settings.

I have put together what information I can glean about her life and career, mostly from the British Newspaper Archive and Ancestry.com.  As well as biographical details the newspapers have proved useful in gauging the response to her books which, while never aspiring to high art, were popular, if not always appreciated by the critics.

Enid was born on 31 May 1911 in Thornton Heath, Surrey.[1]  Her father was Herbert Leonard Brockies (1878–1967), and her mother (my great aunt) was Ellen Lockhart (1886–1951).  Herbert and Ellen were both born in London, and they married in July 1910.  Enid was their only child.  In 1919 Herbert was an accountant, the family living at 8 Peel Street, Hull.[2]  At the time of the 1921 Census they were living at 19 The Terrace, Roker, Sunderland.  Herbert’s occupation was given as senior audit clerk for a firm of chartered accountants.  Ellen was a housewife.  Enid attended Sunderland High School for Girls.[3]

By the time the 1939 England and Wales Register was compiled they were living at 7 Park Parade, Roker, Sunderland.  Herbert gave his occupation as secretary to a transport company, Ellen was engaged in domestic duties, unpaid, and Enid gave her occupation as novelist.  She was unmarried.

Enid possessed a good singing voice.  In May 1928, shortly before her 17th birthday, she competed in the North of England Musical Tournament in Newcastle and was placed second in the solo singing for girls (senior) category.[4]  In June 1931, she repeated her success at the North of England Musical Tournament, achieving a bronze medal for singing to her own piano accompaniment.[5]  She came first in the contralto section of the solo singing, open aria classes.[6]

Her success in competition enabled her to appear on the radio.  Later in June 1931, the North Mail printed a paragraph (with photograph) about her: “Miss Enid Brockies, who is to sing two groups of songs in the mid-day broadcast concert from Newcastle to-morrow, is well-known in the North.  She is a Sunderland girl who has a wonderful mezzo-soprano voice and has every prospect of a successful career as a vocalist.  She has already won silver and bronze medals in open competitions.”[7]  The schedule for the Northern regional programme appeared in the daily and regional press, billing her as a mezzo-soprano with the Northern Studio Orchestra, Newcastle studio.[8]

North Mail, 29 June 1931

She performed in Sunderland High School Old Girls’ Literary and Dramatic Society productions, notably The Yeoman of the Guard and Iolanthe.[9]  In 1929 she was “a capable Dame Carruthers” in The Yeoman of the Guard.[10]  In December 1933 the Sunderland Echo carried a photograph of her, announcing she would be performing the title role in Iolanthe.[11]  Reviewing the production favourably, the Sunderland Echo called her “a demure Iolanthe”.[12]

Attempting to turn her musical experience into paid employment, working at home, she placed an advertisement in the Sunderland Echo advertising as a “teacher of voice production, singing and pianoforte.”[13]  As this is the only reference to her offer of private tuition it may not have been a successful venture.  That seems to be the end of her career as a singer and teacher, and she diverted her considerable energies into authorship.  There may have been little pressure on her to find paid employment because in addition to her father’s income, in late 1933 her mother received a £500 inheritance from the estate of Ellen’s uncle, Sam Lockhart, who had died in May that year.[14]

In 1936 Enid’s first novel, The Girl from Moinette's appeared.  She adopted the grand pen name Countess Hélène Magriska, though it was not to protect her identity as she did not keep her real name secret.  As a marketing ploy it certainly made her stand out in a crowded field.  The book was published by Mellifont Press, which specialised in pulp titles and cheap reprints of classics.  Unfortunately, it does not seem to have been much noticed, and blurbs accompanying later books tended to ignore it.  But it launched her on her career, and though The Girl from Moinette’s does not seem to have been a success initially, a second edition appeared in 1940, presumably on the back of subsequent novels.

In her new guise she had a letter in Picturegoer Weekly.  Signed “(Countess) Hélène Magriska”, she wrote as “a regular reader of your wonderful film-paper”.  She proposed Otto Kruger as “the star whom I consider has the most musical speaking voice on the screen.”[15]  It is likely from her novels with a United States setting that she was an avid cinema patron, as there is no evidence she travelled outside the UK.

Her next book, Ten Poplars (1937), received much more attention than its predecessor, and it was clear that Enid had the support of her parents in her new venture as it was dedicated “to Marmee and Daddy in appreciation of their loving encouragement.”  Her relationship with the local press paid off as she received a warm notice in the Sunderland Echo.[16]  The ‘A Woman’s View’ column compiled by ‘Miss Gadabout’ announced the publication of the “first big book” of the “young Wearside novelist, known as a singer.”  Having reminded readers that Enid was well-known locally as a singer, it continued that she was having considerable success as a novelist.  As well as her achievements at the North of England Musical Tournament and appearances in Gilbert and Sullivan, it mentions that she “was for some time with Mr Henry Baynton’s Shakespearean Company.”

Henry Baynton (1892-1951) was an actor-manager of the old school, producing, and performing in, a wide repertoire drawn largely, though not confined to, the Shakespearian canon.  While he worked extensively in London, he put on seasons outside it.  His obituary states that he toured the provinces with his company until he disbanded it in 1930.[17]  While ‘was for a time’ implies Enid went on tour with him, it seems more likely that she acted with him while he was appearing locally.  He was frequently in Sunderland, putting on seasons at the Empire Theatre and Victoria Hall in 1923, 1924, 1927, 1928 and 1929.[18]  As he brought the principal actors with him, Enid was likely to have been a locally-recruited extra.  Her name does not appear in any of Baynton’s newspaper advertising.

‘Miss Gadabout’ refers to her circus connection, noting that her grandfather was elephant trainer Henry Lockhart, and her cousin was George Lockhart, ringmaster at Blackpool Tower.  Intriguingly, it states that Enid had only recently taken to writing, and although Ten Poplars was her “first big venture,” she had had “several small efforts published,” presumably short stories in magazines as well as The Girl from Moinette’s.

In all, Enid wrote fifteen novels which were published between 1936 and 1950, the final three posthumously.  Once she got into her stride she produced two novels a year, with a gap in 1942.  Some of her books appear to have made little impact, but a few titles were extremely popular; an advertisement in the Yorkshire Post announcing the publication of Polished Jade (1943) included the detail that Silken Sin was in its 160th thousand.[19]  The dust jacket of her final novel, The Scarlet Flame (1950), proclaimed that The Blonde Sinner was in its 165th thousand, and that “The sale of Countess Magriska’s novels now exceed one million copies!”  Perhaps the figure was an exaggeration, but her sales must have been decent enough; from 1939 all her books were produced by John Long Ltd, which would not have continued to publish an unsuccessful writer.  A review of And Then Onide Laughed (1941) referred to her as “a terribly popular author.”[20]  She knew her market, yet it is a sign of how ephemeral they were considered that most of her titles are now so hard to find.

Enid died on 2 July 1943 at 7 Park Parade, aged 31 and her death was registered the same day.  Her death certificate gives her occupation as “Spinster, a novelist, daughter of Herbert Leonard Brockies, a secretary, transport contractors”, so managing to say more about him than her.  The cause of death was given as cardiac failure, and toxic adenoma of thyroid.  The thyroid adenoma would have led to excessive thyroid hormone production, which in turn could have led to the heart issue which was the primary cause of death.  A brief obituary appeared in the Sunderland Echo the following day. ‘Died at Roker: Passing of Sunderland Novelist’.[21]  It included both her real name and her pen name, and gave a partial list of her novels.

She was buried in Mere Knolls Cemetery, Torver Crescent, Fulwell, Sunderland.[22]  The Sunderland Ward of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints kindly provided a photograph showing that Enid does not have her own headstone.  Instead, she has a plaque, now considerably worn, placed haphazardly on the grave containing her father’s body.  Presumably this was intended to be a temporary marker while her grave settled, but it remains unclear why she was not given a permanent headstone, or at least had her name included on her father’s headstone when it was carved.  Conditions during the war were undoubtedly challenging, but her parents had ample time to rectify the situation after its conclusion.  The plaque is a rather sad spectacle.

Reproduced with the permission
of the Sunderland Ward of
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Was she any good?  Reviewers often praised her inventiveness and characterisation, while noting far-fetched plots; others were dismissive, or suggested that readers knew exactly what they were going to get.  Judging by newspaper descriptions, she had a wide range, and while the United States was a favourite setting, she was adept at situating her narratives in a variety of locations, and including current events.  She could also mix genres: Ten Poplars is listed in both The Checklist of Science-Fiction and Supernatural Fiction, and Science Fiction and Fantasy Literature, indicating the science fiction element (the Z-Q-Ray machine which made faces look younger) in its love triangle.[23]  She was certainly not a first-rate stylist, but she had the ability to make her readers keep coming back for more.  Some of the reviews hint that she could be quite racy, and Silken Sin was banned in Australia until 1963 (the list of banned books was quite a long one).[24]

I would like to find out as much as possible about Enid, and track down her books.  Other than the British Newspaper Archive and Ancestry.com, information is hard to come by.  I approached Sunderland and Tyne and Wear archives, and Sunderland Antiquarians, but none had anything on her in their files.  After Ellen’s death, Herbert married Eleanor Auld Wilson Garraway in 1954.  He died in 1967 and she died in Darlington in 1993.  The Darlington archive had nothing on Brockies, Magriska or Garraway.

It does not look like Herbert and Eleanor had children together.  Enid’s papers were probably destroyed, as is so often the case, but it is possible they still exist.  If anybody has any information on Enid, or has any of her books for sale, I should be very happy to hear from them (tom.ruffles@yahoo.co.uk).

 

Footnotes

[1] UK Census, 1921.
[2] Kelly’s Directory, 1919.
[3] Sunderland Echo, 9 March 1937; Sunderland Echo, 3 July 1943.
[4] Yorkshire Post, 18 May 1928.
[5] North Mail, 3 June 1931.
[6] Sunderland Echo, 5 June 1931; Shields Daily News, 6 June 1931.
[7] North Mail, 29 June 1931
[8] Birmingham Gazette, Daily Express, Daily Herald, Liverpool Post, North Mail, The Times, 30 June 1931.
[9] Sunderland Echo, 3 July 1943.
[10] Sunderland Echo, 18 December 1929.
[11] Sunderland Echo, 4 December 1933.
[12] Sunderland Echo, 21 December 1933.
[13] Sunderland Echo, 21 April 1934.
[14] Royal Leamington Spa Courier, 1 September 1933.
[15] Picturegoer Weekly, 8 August 1936.
[16] Sunderland Echo, 9 March 1937.
[17] The Times, 4 January 1951.
[18] Sunderland Echo, 29 December 1923; Sunderland Echo, 18 December 1924; Sunderland Echo, 18 November 1927; Sunderland Echo, 7 April 1928, 20 April 1928; Sunderland Echo, 30 March 1929.
[19] Yorkshire Post, 15 January 1943.
[20] Liverpool Echo, 1 April 1942.
[21] Sunderland Echo, 3 July 1943.

[22] Mere Knolls Cemetery Index, http://www.sunderlandward.co.uk/mereknolls/mereknollsb4.htm (accessed 20 July 2025).
[23] The Checklist of Science-Fiction and Supernatural Fiction, by E F Bleilier, Glen Rock, New Jersey: Firebell Books, 1978; Science Fiction and Fantasy Literature, by Robert Reginald, Douglas Menville and Mary A Burgess, Detroit, Michigan: Dale, 1979.

[24] The Canberra Times, 2 August 1963, p. 7.

 

Appendix: Enid and Ellen - joint authorship?

While researching the Countess, I was struck by several thoughts.  Firstly, she was remarkably prolific, producing fifteen novels in about eight years and already displaying maturity as a writer in her mid-20s.  She may have been a prodigy, but it occurred to me that the extensive output in such a short period could be more easily explained if her mother Ellen had collaborated with her.

Ellen may also have helped with the American elements in some of the books.  Although she was born in London, her parents travelled extensively.  Her father, Harry, worked for the Ringling Brothers’ circus, which had its base in Baraboo, Wisconsin, and for Orrin Brothers circus, which toured the United States and opened a circus in Mexico City in 1894.  Ellen’s youngest sibling, my grandfather, was born in Chicago in 1896, and Harry died in Mexico City in 1905, when Ellen was 19.  It is highly likely that Ellen had travelled to the United States in her youth.  She was in a position to contribute local colour, supplemented by exposure to current Hollywood cinema and magazines.

Then there is the matter of the three titles published after Enid’s death.  Steve Holland attributes their delayed release to wartime paper shortages, but this is surmise.  Although paper rationing in the UK continued until 1954, it seems unlikely that the prepared manuscript of her final novel would have had to wait until 1950, especially as sales in her lifetime had been robust.  One would have expected her publisher, John Long, to prioritise it over the submissions of newer, less established, authors.

An alternative explanation is that, following Enid’s death in 1943, Ellen might have completed any unfinished manuscripts, and possibly written the final one herself, using the established Hélène Magriska brand to boost sales.  Ellen died in 1951, which would have brought the venture to an end.  Without documentation, I have no evidence to support this hypothesis, but it is an intriguing possibility.  Perhaps future textual analysis will be able to clarify the authorship of the Magriska corpus.

 

Novels by Countess Magriska

I have taken this list from Steve Holland’s Bear Alley blog post (8 May 2016) on Enid, which alerted me to her existence, and the family connection:

The Girl from Moinette's. London: Mellifont Press (3150), 1936, 2nd ed. 1940.

Ten Poplars. London: Constable & Co., 1937.

Love in Morocco. London: Fiction House (Piccadilly Novels 93), 1938.

Whirled Into Marriage. London: Fiction House (Piccadilly Novels 104), Dec 1938.

Egyptian Love. London: Fiction House (Piccadilly Novels 122), Sep 1939; London, Edward Foster, 1947.

Blonde Sinner. London: John Long, 1939.

Silken Sin. London: John Long, 1939.

Black Ballerina. London: John Long, 1940.

Dark Madonna. London: John Long, 1940.

Crimson Brocade. London: John Long, 1941.

And Then Onide Laughed. London: John Long, 1941.

The House of Caddalo. London: John Long, 1943.

Polished Jade. London: John Long, 1943.

The Devil Shed Tears. London: John Long, 1944.

Happily Ever After. London: John Long, 1945.

The Scarlet Flame. London: John Long, 1950.

 

(Updated 1 August 2025)

How to Capture an Organisation

I had not intended to revisit the evolving difficulties within the Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena (ASSAP), as they quickly became convoluted and probably of little interest to outsiders, revolving around technical issues such as the validity of Articles of Association and the knock-on effects for the organisation now.  These are dry matters, but ones which have generated a great deal of hostility and been used as a vehicle to enable a small group, initially calling itself the Fellowship, to take control of the organisation.  EGMs and an AGM have come and gone, and despite my feeling that the Fellowship would be held to account, a combination of canny operating and passivity among the bulk of the organisation has allowed it to emerge triumphant.  In retrospect, I was over-optimistic that ASSAP’s mechanisms would neutralise them, because these can be turned to advantage if the Machiavellian impulse is strong enough.

There were genuine concerns with the Articles and governance matters previous Executives had long failed to address, but these should have been dealt with by the then Executive as a whole, rather than a cabal – the Fellowship – operating within it.  The reason for the secrecy was allegedly the benign one to protect and not upset the chair and treasurer, as if going behind their backs would not create upset, and unsurprisingly it failed; but whatever the reason, this groupuscule morphed into a power base.  As a consequence, over the last year or so what amounts to a civil war has continued, with the Fellowship (a name causing general derision, even more so the risible attempt to rebrand it “the concerned majority”, a majority achieved by the attrition of the opposition) gradually taking control by forcing out those members who disagreed with it.

Christian Jensen Romer, who as ex-chair of ASSAP has been close to the situation, has written a number of posts on his blog And Sometimes he’s so Nameless, and there is little point in repeating his critique here.  However, the organisation reached a crossroads with the long-anticipated Annual General Meeting (16 June 2025).  It saw the consolidation of the Executive’s hold, and there are lessons to be learned in the way a small group mounted a coup which would have seemed unlikely, perhaps even to them, at the outset of the infighting.  I thought it worth putting down my observations of how the saga has unfolded.

In the following points I use the term Executive rather than Fellowship, a term coined to suggest a small band valiantly fighting a despotic adversary, but coming over as pretentious to the point its members became fed up hearing it.  The current wider, largely co-opted, Executive may not have been party to the initial schism, but the trajectory taken by the current Executive aligns with the Fellowship’s intentions, and they are thus complicit with it even if they protest they are acting in the best interests of ASSAP and only wish to help it survive.  It is a sign of the hollowing out of the organisation’s talent through expulsion or resignation that only eight Executive positions (of 12) were filled prior to the 2025 AGM.

The tactics employed by the Executive are a textbook example of how to take over an organisation and bend it to one’s own interest, even if contrary to the spirit of the founders.  I have seen examples of all of them exposed on the ‘Members of ASSAP (Unofficial)’ Facebook page, the main independent forum to address the evolving situation, a page subject to much opprobrium by the Executive; in effect it was cast as an outgroup of destructive agitators, which allowed the Executive, in the pose of representing the ingroup, to demonise it.  Here, in no particular order, are techniques useful in a power grab:

Obviously, control communication channels, for example by using the website, the official ASSAP mailing list and Facebook page for pro-Executive and anti-dissent propaganda, while not allowing critics an unfettered voice.  Work on the principle that in the absence of counter-information, if a statement is made frequently enough many people will come to believe it, irrespective of its truth, or at least cease to care.

Make the Executive such an unfriendly place to those fellow Executive members who disagree with the faction that they feel it is not worth continuing and resign, giving the plotters a majority.  Bypass those remaining by continuing private discussions.

Co-opt onto the Executive individuals who feel the survival of the organisation is paramount, irrespective of who is in charge and whatever the consequences.  This lowers the profile of the plotters and allows them to claim a wide base of support for their actions (c.f. “useful idiot”).  The drawback is the high turnover when newcomers, who are mainly – although not always – acting from the best of intentions realise the unenviable situation they have stumbled into. This revolving door can be turned by account by arguing it results from the stresses of having to deal with relentless external hostility, even if it is actually non-existent.

Scapegoat individuals who had previously been in Executive roles, blaming them for current problems.  Any difficulties are therefore someone else’s fault because they were unhelpful or disruptive at best, corrupt at worst.  Make it seem like recent post-holders have failed in their obligations when it is clear different managements going back decades have not acted efficiently, which includes some of those now in control.  Repeatedly say current Executive members have been funding operations from their own pockets to show how selfless they are, not like the other lot, even if banking problems are largely of its own making.  At the same time stress successes, such as an alleged increase in membership, and the maintenance of activities.

Intimidate members of the organisation with threats of expulsion/suspension to damp down critical voices.   Do not shrink from hostile acts, for example sending a leading critic and past member of the Executive a funeral display while referring to her in a leaked email as a “bitch rottweiler” and then complaining about a potential data breach rather than an unacceptable slur by one of its own.  Most people will not get involved because they are there for the ghosts rather than the roasts and will not want to endanger their membership.  Simply ignore complaints and votes of no confidence submitted by concerned members.

Rewrite history and gaslight critics, for example pretending that hostile actions on the part of the Executive had not happened, even though the evidence for the actions exists, such as pretending the funeral display incident never occurred, despite the photographs.  Vigorously deny a coup has happened, even though one demonstrably has.

Suspend and expel critical members on spurious grounds, such as claiming they have brought ASSAP into disrepute by challenging the Executive’s methods, disallowing them from participating in votes or proposing motions that might threaten those now in control.  Citing “bringing the organisation into disrepute” is a handy catch-all that conflates criticism of the way the organisation is now being managed with the organisation itself.  Characterise legitimate criticism as destructive disruption, undermining the Association.  This purge ensures sympathetic or neutral members are eligible to vote in the Executive’s favour while critics are excluded.

Claim victimhood by pretending Executive members are being bullied and threatened, in fact subjected to a “hate campaign” with detrimental effects on the Executive’s mental health; for example by pretending derogatory T-shirts have been made, even though none was, and counting humorous memes made at the expense of the Fellowship as a whole, rather than any particular individual, as bullying.  State the treatment is so bad that posts on the official Facebook page have to be made anonymously to protect Executive members, even though everybody knows who they are and the act is performative.  Be cavalier about applying double standards.

Continue to say one Executive member was pushed to the brink of suicide, even though the claim has been said to have been grossly exaggerated and no evidence has ever been provided.  State there is police involvement as a result of the bullying, to stress the gravity of the situation, without being specific or providing evidence, then use the assertion of police involvement as a pretext for expulsions.  In sum, give the impression the Executive, acting from noble motives, is beleaguered by bad actors who have malicious and self-serving reasons for attacking it, and it is thereby deserving of sympathy.

Claim the endorsement of the Charity Commission for the Executive’s actions, but provide no evidence (sceptics might wonder at the CC’s sudden chattiness when previously they had shown a total lack of interest in the matter, and were unwilling to intervene when concerns were raised about the Executive’s behaviour, but what are the sceptics going to do about it?).

Extend the time until the Executive has to face the membership at an AGM as long as possible, to allow as many disgusted members as possible to resign or allow their memberships to lapse, and to allow time for pro-coup messages to disseminate among those members who are not exposed to alternative viewpoints.  For example, the ASSAP AGM held in June 2025 should have taken place in 2024.

Control the agenda and motions for general meetings.  Pre-vet motions and disallow those that are critical, or would affect the ability to administer unhampered, on the grounds that they are not in the organisation’s interest to have them voted on, rather than putting them to the membership for discussion, as would normally be expected in a democratic body.  Feel free to add “the Executive’s view” paragraphs to motions to steer voters in the right direction.  Ignore awkward questions, either prior to or at general meetings.

Be positive about the organisation’s prospects.  It’s a new dawn, etc., and no one cares about those pointless malcontents who are always carping.  With the bad old days behind us, past battles forgotten, the future is bright with promise.  Stress that transparency, safeguarding and fairness will be core values going forward.  Remember to keep a straight face.  Having employed the foregoing arsenal, one is ready for an AGM.

ASSAP’s long delayed one was held on 16 June 2025.  Despite the crisis that has engulfed ASSAP, only fifty people attended the online meeting, suggesting a lack of interest by many members.  Maintaining the sense of a threat from ill-wishers by insinuating that some might try to barge into the event, even though it was highly unlikely, attendees were obliged to have names displayed and cameras on at all times, and were frequently reminded to do so.  Those with camera issues were prevented from exercising their democratic rights, even though there is no mention of this requirement in the Articles.

A number of resolutions were on the agenda, but the major, and most concerning, one was the first, which proposed the revocation of ASSAP’s charitable status, with the protections and benefits that entails.  The effect would be to allow the Association to be turned into a private commercial company.  No clarity on the reasoning for this dramatic move was given, but the text noted the Charity Commission had not provided useful guidance (despite claiming elsewhere that the Charity Commission was fully supportive of the new Executive), and acting within its constraints was pointless:

“...ASSAP has little benefit from its charitable status but has instead been hand bound (sic) by red tape and regulations intended to protect the needs of charities far bigger than ourselves. Moreover, whenever we have sought help and guidance from the CC it has been much lacking and of little real help.”

“Accordingly, we propose that with effect from October 1st 2025 ASSAP revoke its charitable status. From that date it is proposed that it operate as an Association of paying Members. It is further proposed that it be overseen by an Executive Council that will be elected every two years…”

I think all can agree the Charity Commission has proved toothless, though perhaps its indifference has worked to the Executive’s advantage as the Commission has allowed the present situation to unfold without hindrance.  The resolution was short on detail, in particular the relationship of this Executive Council to the membership, and what democratic mechanisms would exist (the suspicion is – minimal).  In the event, at the AGM it was immediately withdrawn without explanation.  So why was it put forward?  Presumably the move would have allowed the expansion of commercial activities, though there are implications in abandoning its charitable status, such as the tax advantages and what happens to the old organisation’s assets.  But it would remove the Charity Commission’s pesky oversight, which even if weak still has to be a consideration for those registered with it.

Naturally the withdrawal led to puzzlement on the part of outsiders, but one explanation is that the Executive felt it was too soon for such a radical step, while it was consolidating its position.  It is therefore possible the resolution will be brought back at some future point, once the Executive can be assured of its success.  Despite the drawbacks, turning ASSAP into a commercial organisation would have benefits, such as allowing the payment of salaries to the Executive Council.  Training modules could be licenced to other organisations and merchandising expanded.  The downside would be the change to the organisation’s ethos, which is strengthened by its charitable status.

The rest of the meeting largely went the Executive’s way, although there was some muted criticism of the way matters had been handled by the Executive, and scepticism when the meeting chair said the process for expulsions had been a difficult one, because it looked like individuals had been expelled with considerable ease.  The assertion that those being considered for expulsion had been given the benefit of the doubt whenever possible was greeted with surprise by some, as that was not how it had seemed.  The cull of opposition members prior to the AGM was a coincidence, we were assured.  Dramatically, right at the end of the meeting one of the new Executive members, who had survived the rigorous weeding-out process of candidates, laid into the Executive’s behaviour and promptly resigned, leaving only seven Executive members in what was an already considerably underpowered group (it was a sign of the success of the efforts to marginalise the dissidents that whereas at the previous AGM there were more candidates than positions, necessitating hustings, now there were fewer candidates, meaning no need for elections).

When the new executive positions were announced shortly after the AGM, Steve Parsons, someone who had denied there was ever a coup, emerged as the new chair.  His ascent did bear out my prediction early on that of the original Fellowship he would be the one most likely to survive, but I never thought the plotters would prove so successful in subverting a democratically-elected executive; pushing out those who did not align with their aims and taking over; tightening their hold at the AGM; and packing the new administration with simpatico individuals.  It was ruthless, but it worked.  Other organisations which tell themselves it couldn’t happen to them should take note: complacency is dangerous.

So, what now for ASSAP?  Like any new regime with shaky legitimacy, the Executive will continue to tighten its grip, marginalise its opponents, trumpet its successes and minimise its failures.  Perhaps it will make a success of ASSAP, and the way the Fellowship went from plotters to dominance will be largely forgotten.  The stakes are high, and the Executive will need to be able to demonstrate, rather than merely assert, that ASSAP has become stronger under its watch.  If it manages to do so, and if there are truly democratic elections in future (not a given) at which they are returned to office, then they will have succeeded, despite the upset and anger caused by the shoddy way they went about the business.  But for those left bloodied and bruised along the way, the price will have been a high one.

 

Acknowledgement: The image is courtesy of Gemini, using the prompt “a group of scruffily-dressed men and women plotting around a table.”  Without the amplification I was given a group of sharply-dressed men, and I wanted it to look more realistic.

The Buckmaster Bequest and Systems Methodology - How's it Going?

I last wrote in August 2022 about the saga of Dr David Rousseau’s lacklustre effort (ongoing since March 2014) to complete a £78,000 contract with the Society for Psychical Research to supply a modest number of publications (‘Systems Methodology and the Buckmaster Bequest: An Update’).  Drawing on the generous bequest made by Nigel Buckmaster to the Society, the agreement was to provide six academic papers and a handbook demonstrating the application of systems methodology to psychical research.  However, progress has been slow, in recent years due to long-lasting family issues (which thankfully were not so severe as to prevent him co-authoring a prize-winning entry for the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies’ 2021 essay competition).

A number of Dr Rousseau’s long-awaited papers were finally deposited in the SPR library in early 2023, and I listed and analysed them in a March 2023 update to my August 2022 update, concluding that Dr Rousseau was being coy about his association with the SPR despite its generous funding, and it was hard to see what relevance the bulk of them had for psychical research.  Of the handbook there was still no sign.

It has become standard for the Buckmaster Oversight Committee report contained in the SPR’s Annual Report to refer to difficulties that have delayed completion of Dr Rousseau’s work, while remaining optimistic about its imminent conclusion.  The latest by its chair Dr Richard Broughton, in the 2023/24 SPR Annual Report (published in April 2025), is no different:

“Dr David Rousseau has reported that the Systems Methodology for Exploratory Science project is again on track after an unavoidable pause due to family matters. He expects to complete the remaining product of this project. the practical handbook for applying Systems Methodology to the problems of psychical research by [the] summer of 2025. In the interim he has added an important paper to his collection of published papers arising from this project that is available in the SPR Library.”

It’s good to hear the family matters have finally been resolved, but the claim that the handbook is going to be ready in the near future has been the case for years: Dr Rousseau’s progress has been repeatedly said to be nearly there in a manner that would do Zeno of Elea proud.  In the meantime, though, there is an addition to the set of articles considered to be part of the Buckmaster submission.  Naturally I was keen to see it and requested a copy.

I was kindly emailed one by Dr Broughton.  It is ‘Response to Editorial “Should IANDS Endorse a Post-Physicalist Worldview?”: NDE Research Needs Firm Guiderails but Soft Boundaries’, which appeared in the Journal of Near-Death Studies, 41(2), Summer 2023, pp. 134-44.

At least the subject matter is more relevant to psychical research than many of Dr Rousseau’s other Buckmaster articles appear to be, but the only time the SPR’s name appears is in a passing reference to the 1894 ‘Report on the Census of Hallucinations’.  As with the previous articles, despite the standard “SPR Library Copy: Buckmaster Fund Project Systems Methodology for Spontaneous Case Analysis” stamp applied to the first page, the SPR’s financial support is not acknowledged.  The International Association for Near-Death Studies, not the SPR, holds the copyright.

I noticed Dr Rousseau describes himself as an “associate research professor at Oregon State University in Corvallis, OR.”  The Oregon State University website notes that this is a “courtesy appointment”, meaning he is neither employed nor paid by OSU (though an earlier, unpublished, Buckmaster paper received support of some kind from OSU to produce it).  The extent of his academic responsibilities there is unclear.  The other affiliation listed, the Centre for Systems Philosophy, of which he is “Director of Research”, is his own organisation.  As in the other papers submitted to fulfil his Buckmaster obligations he does not mention he is a Council member of the SPR.

Judging by Google Scholar I should say that Dr Rousseau’s claim to have had “more than 50 publications in peer-reviewed academic literature” seems right, making him fairly productive, though little cited.  I am not faulting his work, merely the wisdom of awarding him the astonishingly large sum of £78,000 for a miscellaneous handful of papers, the bulk of which appear tangential to psychical research, and a book he has failed to submit over a decade after he began the undertaking.

A sceptic would by now be forgiven for wondering whether the promised date of delivery will be continually pushed back, forever in motion but never arriving, until the Buckmaster Oversight Committee is wound up and the matter is no longer mentioned.  A possible scenario is that eventually it will waive the handbook in exchange for a few extra articles.  This would be unfortunate, as those of us who take an interest in the matter are hoping the handbook will explain in what way Dr Rousseau’s articles sent to the SPR have a bearing on psychical research.  It may well be that his systems approach will represent a significant advance, but it would be helpful if he could demonstrate to us non-specialists how this might be achieved.  According to the latest estimate, the fabled handbook should at last be available by the end of August this year.  We shall see.

The SPR’s Annual Report going back to 2016/17 can be found on the SPR website.

Acknowledgement: The image was generated by Crayion AI, using the prompt “the application of systems methodology to psychical research.”  I don’t think it tried very hard.

 

What’s next for the American Society for Psychical Research?

by Tom Ruffles and James A. Conrad

 

There have been significant developments in the four years since Tom Ruffles last wrote about the gradual decline of the American Society for Psychical Research (ASPR), the New York-based nonprofit organisation with a history dating back to 1884 (not 1885 as misstated for decades by current ASPR leadership, and widely repeated elsewhere).  These developments involve what appear to be murky financial transactions which had gone unchecked by regulatory bodies, despite concerned outsiders having warned them repeatedly of the deteriorating situation.

The ASPR had once been in good financial health.  It had fully owned its townhouse headquarters in New York City since 1966, when Chester Carlson (physicist and inventor of the Xerox copying process), who had previously provided financial support for research, gave the ASPR the funds to purchase a superb building just steps from Central Park.  The beautiful five-storey building, with nine fireplaces imported from Italy, was originally constructed in 1903 as a luxury residence (‘The 1903 Strasburger House -- No. 5 West 73rd Street’).  In 1978, reaffirmed in 1990, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission designated the entire block, including the ASPR’s lot, a Historic District.

In addition to the building, when Carlson died in 1968 he left over $1 million in stock to the ASPR's endowment fund (‘American Society for Psychical Research’).  Sustained by this financial security, the organisation possessed a high profile in psychical research.  During the last three decades, however, the position has altered drastically, with large financial deficits, the unavailability of its library and archive, the cessation of its activities, and now the loss of its headquarters building.  It is worth examining the sorry affair in detail.

 

View and location of No. 5 West 73rd Street

Mortgaged to the hilt

The 2000s and 2010s saw the gradual conversion by ASPR president Nancy Sondow of the value of the nonprofit’s prestigious building at 5 West 73rd Street in Manhattan into cash via mortgages.  According to New York City official property records, between 26 September 2002 and 30 July 2019, Sondow, acting on behalf of the organisation, signed five mortgages (property equity loans) and four mortgage consolidation agreements, using the fully-owned ASPR building and lot as collateral.  The fifth mortgage, on 30 July 2019 for $1,750,000, was concurrent with the individual loans being combined into the final mortgage consolidation agreement, by which time the unpaid principal balance owed by the ASPR was $11,750,000.  For those unfamiliar with the details, a mortgage is the part of a loan agreement that describes the property being used as collateral for the cash received by way of the loan.  The other part is a promissory note, which is referenced in the mortgage.  It sets out the interest rate and repayment schedule.  Mortgages are required to be recorded in the official property records of New York City; promissory notes are not.  The cash amount of the loan is the same on both documents.

The ASPR’s mortgage loan amounts and dates signed by Sondow are as follows (these are the dates signed, not the document dates): $1,500,000 (26 September 2002), $3,951,784.35 (21 July 2011), $2,000,000 (12 May 2014), $2,800,000 (22 May 2016), and $1,750,000 (30 July 2019), a staggering total of $12,001,784.35.  There is a satisfaction of mortgage (i.e. a document acknowledging that the terms of the mortgage agreement have been fulfilled) showing in the property records for the first mortgage because the loan was acquired by another lender and the original lender needed to state that it was no longer involved.  The mortgage came due on 29 July 2020, but the ASPR failed to pay the outstanding principal and interest on that date, thereby defaulting on the loan.

These figures have to compared with those reported to the federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on its annual Form 990 return.  According to the 2019 990, the mortgages totalled $10,000,000 at the start of the year and $11,750,000 at the end, reflecting the mortgage for $1,750,000 signed in July 2019.  On this, $1,097,845 in interest was paid.  It is curious that Sondow signed another mortgage in 2019 while the property was being put on the market because payments could not be met.  The mortgage amount reported to the IRS in subsequent years remained at $11,750,000 until the start of 2022, and by the end of that year was showing as $0.

Whether the ASPR’s executive director Patrice Keane had a direct role in the mortgage transactions arranged by Sondow is unknown.  Keane’s signature does not appear on any of the five mortgages signed by Sondow but her email address alone is given on mortgage number five, 30 July 2019, and on the final mortgage consolidation agreement, also 30 July 2019, which lists all the previous mortgages, as one of the contractually obligated places to send notices and requests.  The other contacts are Sondow and the ASPR’s then attorney, Jay Gerzog.  With regard to the promissory notes, it is unknown if Keane received any notices, or if her name or email address appear on any of them.  The notes are kept privately by the lender and borrower.  Since Keane was the only salaried employee, one would expect her to have been aware of the sources of her nonprofit’s income.

 

Five mortgages, 2002-2019

After the mortgages were signed the money effectively vanished, with no explanation by the ASPR leadership to the public or membership as to why the five loans were needed and what became of the money.  Unless it, or what is recoverable, reemerges at some future point, this is money lost to the mission for which the ASPR was set up.  Unfortunately, it appears that a significant portion of the borrowed money was used to pay monthly interest and is gone forever.  Eventually, with the ASPR having no funds to pay back the consolidation mortgage, the ASPR’s Manhattan headquarters building was put up for sale in July 2019 with a price tag of just under $18 million.  It failed to sell (the Covid pandemic cannot have helped), the price was reduced to $15,750,00, and it was eventually withdrawn.

There was a silver lining for the ASPR to the pandemic, however, because it received two loans from the U.S. Government under the Paycheck Protection Program (‘PPP Loan Data – American Society For Psychical Research, New York, NY’).  Provided by the Small Business Administration, one was for $26,380 in May 2020, the second for $26,382 in March 2021 – a total of $52,762.  The PPP website states that “the vast majority of businesses are expected to have the majority or all of their PPP loan forgiven by the SBA, effectively making it a grant.”   Why a significant sum of money was made available to an organisation that was moribund is a question for the Small Business Administration to answer.

 

Follow the money

The ASPR’s declining fortunes can be followed by examining its obligatory financial returns (it is registered as a non-profit under 501(c)(3) Title 26 of the United States Code, making it exempt from property taxes; according to the ProPublica website, it has been tax-exempt since September 1942).  It makes two types of financial filings.  One is Form 990, ‘Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax’, submitted to the IRS.  The other is Form CHAR500, ‘Annual Filing for Charitable Organizations’, submitted to the New York State Office of the Attorney General Charities Bureau.  These make fascinating reading, as they allow outsiders a glimpse of developments within the organisation that would otherwise be hidden from the outside world.

Tracking back over the past half decade, the 2019 Form 990, dated 29 October 2020, shows a number of individuals as trustees, though none can be said to be particularly well-known in the field (the last person to sit on the board with a profile in parapsychology was Keith Harary, who had left by the time the 2018 Form 990 was produced).  In addition to Sondow, the board comprised George Kokoris, Barbara Gallagher, Susan Hurley, Elizabeth Maldonado and Marie Cooper Janis.  Janis is probably Maria Cooper Janis, the daughter of the actor and Hollywood legend Gary Cooper (she also goes by the name Marie).  These individuals’ names have not been publicised by the ASPR and are only known because of the requirement to file legal documents.  In addition to their positions as trustees, Sondow was listed as president, Kokoris as treasurer and second vice president, and Janis as first vice president, though these vice-presidential roles are not explained.  None of these positions was renumerated.  Keane’s salary was $139,955.

Mysteriously, a loan appears on the 2019 Form 990 Schedule L (“Transactions With Interested Persons”) from the ASPR to Nancy Sondow in the amount of $1,770,000 for the purpose of “working capital”, though working for what purpose is left unspecified.  At this point the ASPR was running a deficit of minus $12,058,585, up from minus $10,509,248 the previous year.  The 2019 Form 990 form shows Sondow as president and trustee, but the Form CHAR500 for 2019 was co-signed by Sondow as President/Treasurer and Kokoris as Treasurer; Sondow had suddenly become co-treasurer besides her role as president, though this was only temporary.

 

The loan to Nancy Sondow

On the matter of loans, it is worth noting that according to the website of the Office of the New York State Attorney General, “Charities, other than those established as education corporations, are not permitted to lend money to their officers and directors, even if they have good business reasons for wanting to make the loan” (‘Frequently Asked Questions for Charities, Non-Profits & Fundraisers’).  However, New York State law makes no mention of any exception for education corporations (‘Section 716: Loans to directors, officers and key persons’).  It might be argued that one of the purposes of the ASPR is education, and the word appears a number of times in its supporting 990 documentation, but to the question on the 990 form, “Is the organization an educational institution subject to the section 4968 excise tax on net investment income?”, the answer is “no”, and it would be hard to describe the ASPR as an education corporation.  Similarly, the online legal dictionary USLegal specifically defines an Educational Corporation as “a corporation formed not for profit but for an educational purpose, particularly the establishment and maintenance of a school, college, or university” (‘Educational Corporation Law and Legal Definition’).  Some clarity on the nature of the loan to Sondow would be welcome.  It would not be enough to state that it was authorised by the board and therefore is legitimate.

Examining the 2020 Form 990, dated 28 October 2021, Keane is listed as executive director, with a salary of $293,662, which is an increase of $100,000 on the previous year (there seems to be no rationale for her wildly fluctuating remuneration).  The loan to Sondow for working capital is now showing as $1,750,000, $20,000 having presumably been repaid.  Kokoris is shown as treasurer and Maldonado is secretary, though the latter is an unpaid honorary position with one suspects few duties.  The Form CHAR500 document for 2020, dated 16 November 2023, is signed by Sondow and Maldonado, who had taken over Kokoris’s treasurer role, though retitled chief financial officer.  There is no explanation for the delay between submitting the two documents covering 2020, and it is unclear if the delay was related to the Covid-19 pandemic.

There was a hiatus until the summer of 2024, when the APSR belatedly submitted a flurry of financial documents.  There is again no explanation why there was such a lengthy delay.  Whatever the cause, the delay may have involved significant late fees.  The Form 990 for 2021 is dated 14 June 2024, the 2021 Form CHAR500 is dated 15 July 2024.  The Form 990 shows the same set of trustees, with Keane’s salary at a relatively modest $25,300, a marked reduction from previous years and perhaps reflecting financial realities; after all, when haemorrhaging money the optics of recording a six-figure salary on official forms does tend to raise eyebrows.  Again, though, there is a loan shown against Sondow’s name of $1,750,000.  The ASPR’s total assets at the end of the year were $645,544, against total liabilities of $13,540,234, making its net assets minus $12,894,690.  The Form CHAR500 shows that Maldonado had reverted to the less pretentious title of treasurer, though on the 990 she is shown as secretary, Kokoris as treasurer.

CHAR500 forms for 2022 and 2023 do not seem to be available, but the 990s are.  The 2022 Form 990 is dated 20 October 2024.  With total revenue of $19,433,570 and expenses of $7,623,696, net assets now stand at minus $1,093,222, a reduction of $11,801,468.  Income of $18,887,361 (up from $11,524 the preceding year) is allegedly derived from investments, though mysteriously there is no investment detailed.  The eye-watering figure for expenses is largely made up of $7,115,526 in interest payments.  Interest was due on the loan until the property was sold, and would be compounded if no payments were made.  Interest payment in 2020 according to the Form 990 is $158,081, which confirms an inability to service the debt.  The $7,115,526 shown in the 2022 Form 990 return could easily be accrued given the annual interest rate of 15% on the original principal of $11,750,000, plus 10% on late fees.  A $1,750,000 loan for working capital is still shown against Sondow’s name.  Keane’s salary is $88,585, a marked increase on the previous year but nowhere near its historic highs.  As an aside, Keane’s consistently high salary over many years makes her by far the best-paid individual in psychical research.

Where the money might have come from in 2022 to reduce the deficit so significantly is unknown.  No satisfaction (i.e. repayment) of the consolidation mortgage was ever recorded, although this mortgage has disappeared from the ASPR’s balance sheet on the 2022 Form 990 return.  At this point, only the ASPR board, or a forensic accountant with legal access, can shed light on the matter.

The paper trail in this story winds to a close – for now – with the 2023 Form 990, dated 15 November 2024.  Astonishingly, it shows a positive balance, with assets of $2,631,595, a change from the previous year’s minus $1,093,222.  There is no explanation for the injection of cash on this form.  It must be stressed that this is not because of the repayment of the mortgage.  Reflecting the favourable environment, Keane’s salary has more than doubled since the previous year to $199,000.  Sondow’s working capital seems to have finally started working, as the original principal amount of $1,750,000 now shows a balance of $825,000.  While total revenue amounts to $4,165,122, a figure which is not explained, expenses are $467,709, a fraction of the preceding year’s but still substantial.  Perhaps reflecting this increased financial activity, Maldono is joint treasurer with Kokoris, in addition to her role as secretary.  Encouragingly, the supplemental information on the Form 990, carried from year to year, still asserts that:

“The ASPR holds a vast archive of documents, photographs, drawings, rare manuscripts, reports of experiences, research data, correspondence, and books that date back to the 1600s ... The ASPR continues to seek out, collect, preserve, protect, duplicate, digitize, and organize these important research documents for its library and archives.”

There had been considerable expenditure on “rents/storage fees” since 2019, amounting to $21,115 that year, $23,940 in 2020, and $29,042 in 2021.  There was a leap to $47,022 in 2022 and $58,250 in 2023.  This significant amount indicates the extensive archive is still intact, though perhaps is not being expanded to the extent the statement suggests.  If items are being digitised, it is in secret.  That the archive is in storage rather than readily accessible is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, and the level of expenditure is probably unsustainable, throwing its long-term future into doubt.  The storage location and fitness for the purpose are unknown, except to insiders.

 

The unfolding of a scandal

The gradual fall-off and finally cessation of any visible activities and associated financial manoeuvres were for a long time little noticed by those outside the ASPR.  There was no regular programme of lectures or conferences or systematic public communication.  The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, first published in 1907, ceased in 2004, as is stated on the page devoted to the Journal on the ASPR website (the ASPR also published Proceedings on an irregular basis from 1885, but as of this writing it does not merit a page on the website.  The most recent volume on the shelves of the Society for Psychical Research in London is dated 1974, which appears to be the last issued).  This inactivity regarding the Journal should have been a red flag that something was amiss within the organisation.

Despite the obvious decrease in member benefits and public engagement, surprisingly there was a general lack of interest among American parapsychologists, including ex-ASPR members.  More recently, there has been a reluctance to become involved in a campaign to save it, particularly its historically significant archive.  To their shame, board members gradually dropped out and remained silent rather than defend the organisation.  Even when it became clear what was happening with the finances, eminent figures in the field were willing to deplore the situation privately but not act publicly.  Until recently, criticism of the ASPR management was sporadic, the general attitude one of apathy. 

That the situation which is now so painfully evident is not of recent origin is evidenced by Robert McConnell’s expression of disquiet as long ago as 1995 (Far Out in the New Age), and George Hansen’s in 2007 (‘A Salary in Parapsychology: Patrice Keane (ASPR)’), and again in 2012 at that year’s Academy of Spirituality and Paranormal Studies conference.  Hansen noted the scale of the salary paid to Keane, a six-figure sum for activities invisible to the outside, while the Society’s assets were drained.  In 2011 Stacy Horn recounted her frustrations attempting to gain access to the ASPR’s archive (‘What is the deal with the ASPR?’), Guy Lyon Playfair published an article in Fortean Times (‘An American Institution in Low Spirits’) in 2014, and in 2019 Ruffles began to document the saga.

A brief two-part TikTok video, ‘What happened to the American Society for Psychical Research?’ was posted by the GeoHaunts account in 2021.  The first part notes that the ASPR has not opened its doors since 2018 and asks what has happened to the library; the second points out that with their charitable status uncertain, they are still accepting donations, and it includes a note, an opinion by GeoHaunts, stating, “Charity fraud: soliciting donations for an organisation that does little or no work.”  The ASPR certainly does no discernible work and its very dated website as of this writing continues to solicit donations, so the implication is clear.  Sadly, GeoHaunts’ effort has so far gained little traction.

Complaints by a small number of individuals who were appalled at what was happening have been sent to the New York Charities Bureau since 2019, urging it to investigate what was possibly the serious offences of embezzlement and money laundering (no counter-explanation for the disposal of the funds being forthcoming).  Jay Gerzog, the attorney for the ASPR who is listed on the 2019 mortgage consolidation agreement, was notified of the controversy via email by James A. Conrad on 21 September 2020, and a copy was forwarded to the New York Charities Bureau on 23 September, but neither responded.  It included the information that there was a five-year statute of limitations for grand larceny and money laundering, and, based on the publicly recorded date of the loan consolidation, it was due, in Conrad’s view, to expire on 30 July 2024.  Regular follow-up emails to the Charities Bureau were ignored.  These emails urged the intervention of New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, because if there had been malfeasance time was short.  The Charities Bureau is run by the New York Attorney General’s Office, of which Letitia James is currently in charge.

Someone who wrote to the Charities Bureau in 2023 did receive a reply, which was passed to us.  It appears mostly to be a standard response which says that due to the high volume of complaints and limited resources it is not possible to investigate every allegation.  It continues that the Bureau will scrutinise this particular complaint to see if there are grounds for action by the Attorney General, adding: “In addition, we will contact American Society for Psychical Research to request that it remedy its delinquency in filing annual reports with the Charities Bureau.”  While the letter acknowledged there were governance issues, there was no follow-up correspondence.  It is possible that prompting by the Charities Bureau was a factor in the ASPR submitting the outstanding financial returns, though it still took a year for them to act.  At least this correspondent received prompter treatment than Conrad’s efforts to highlight the matter did.

The eleventh email sent to the Charities Bureau by Conrad, on 31 July 2024, noting the ostensible expiry of the statute of limitations, finally elicited a reply the same day in an attached PDF letter, also dated 31 July.  It does not say why no reply had been made to Conrad’s earlier emails.  Again, it appears mostly to be a standard response, claiming that due to the high volume of complaints and limited resources it is not possible to investigate every allegation.  It does not say whether the ASPR will be one of them, only that Conrad’s correspondence will be evaluated.  This is precisely the same boilerplate text as contained in the reply sent to the letter writer the previous year.

As part of the standard text, the letter contains the following caveat: “The complaint you have filed with this Office has no effect on any statute of limitations filing deadlines that might apply to your claim.”  As there has not been a follow-up from them, or any public announcement regarding the ASPR, presumably the Charities Bureau and New York Attorney General Letitia James are still pondering whether to act.  Possibly they calculate the time limits differently, or there are other applicable laws at the state or federal level involving information on tax returns and banking transactions that apply to longer or unlimited investigation deadlines.

 

Charities Bureau letter to James A. Conrad

In addition to direct approaches to the Charities Bureau, Conrad contacted several news media outlets and journalists, including those actively seeking tip-offs, one of whom claimed to specialise in alleged wrongdoing at non-profits.  There were several vague expressions of interest, but none translated into articles.  He also emailed Nicholas J. Little, Legal Director for the New York State-based nonprofit The Center for Inquiry on 20 July 2021 and invited CFI to join the effort in asking the Charities Bureau to investigate, but did not receive a reply.  A petition set up on Change.org in 2019 by a concerned member of the public (neither of the present authors initiated it) has over 600 signers as of this writing but has yet to bring the scandal to wider public attention (‘Save the American Society for Psychical Research!’).

One person who might have been in a position to use his high profile to generate interest in the situation is Dan Aykroyd, who on a number of occasions has cited the influence reading the ASPR Journal had on him when he was developing the script for the 1984 film Ghostbusters, his father having been a subscriber and the movie's story being set in New York City.  He himself was a member (‘No laughing matter’), and in May 2009 chose the ASPR building as the venue for an interview with Seth Schiesel of the New York Times, tied in with the release of a new Ghostbusters game by Atari.  The article describes the building as “one of his favourite places.” (‘New Video Game? Who You Gonna Call?’).  So far, Aykroyd has not added his voice to those who are asking what is happening to the organisation.

Another who has not put his weight publicly behind calls to save the ASPR is novelist Grady Hendrix.  He once worked at the ASPR where, “besides archiving letters, case studies, drawings, and photographs, Hendrix handled the ASPR’s phone line, taking requests for help from researchers and regular people alike.” (‘Grady Hendrix is a comic writer with a thing for horror’).  In November 2024 he was still referring to his time at the ASPR during a book tour (‘This horror writer’s most outlandish character is himself’).  Ruffles wrote to Hendrix via his website email address on 1 July 2020, asking if he had any inside information about the ASPR’s decline, and hoping he might help to publicise the situation.  On 11 November 2024, James A. Conrad invited him on X to email the New York Charities Bureau and ask for an update on their investigation (on the assumption there was one).  Hendrix did not acknowledge either approach.

 

The ASPR headquarters is sold

The Society’s final interaction with the media seems to have been in October 2017, when Keane gave journalist Liz Hardaway a tour of the building for the Our Town website (‘The Psychics of Chelsea’) and mentioned the ASPR was seeking funding for an exhibition on spirit photography, which has yet to materialise.  The article was reproduced on Hardaway’s website, and her two photographs of the inside of the building show the archive was still present at that time.  When contacted by Conrad in a 21 February 2022 email to learn if she or any colleagues might be interested in doing a follow-up story on the current status of the ASPR, she did not reply.

Photographs on real estate websites in 2019 show that some of the books were still in situ as a feature, but the interior had been transformed into a luxurious residence with a white theme to the decor (e.g. ‘$18M Beaux-Arts mansion is an Upper West Side architectural icon with Dakota views’).  By the beginning of 2023, the premises had been completely cleared (‘NYC townhouse and occult researchers’ headquarters lists for $15M’).

The WebCivil Supreme website is a government-operated repository of documents for the New York State Civil Supreme Courts, and it provides valuable information charting the course of the ASPR’s loss of its building.  A foreclosure lawsuit against the ASPR headquarters was filed in the New York State Supreme Court on 11 February 2021, a process that occurs after missed mortgage payments.  The lawsuit named the ASPR and John Does 1-5, a legal tactic that allows naming defendants in the future, for example, if Sondow and Keane became unavailable as the lawsuit progressed through the court system.  As we have seen, the foreclosure lawsuit stated the consolidated loan note had an interest rate of 15% annually and 10% interest on late fees.

 

The lawsuit

The ASPR initially offered a defence to the lawsuit, but later withdrew it, and the judge granted a motion by the lender (Plaintiff) for the court to appoint a trusted individual called a Receiver to take operational management and financial oversight of the property in May 2022.  At this point the ASPR lost physical control of the building (but not legal ownership), as the Receiver would be responsible for preserving the property, subsequent financial transactions, and settling the debt, returning any remaining balance to the organisation.  A “vacancy deadline”, for the building to be vacated, was set at 11.59 pm (New York time) on 19 September, 2022, although this was amenable to modification by mutual agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant.

A “Stipulation of Settlement” was filed on 17 June, 2022.  This was an agreement between the Plaintiff, 73 LLC (i.e. limited liability company), which held the mortgage on 5 West 73rd Street, formerly the ASPR’s headquarters, and the ASPR plus John Does 1-5.  There are two key points to draw from this document.  The first is that the Plaintiff agreed that the outcome of the foreclosure sale would be the limit of their complaint against the ASPR, and that they would not pursue the organisation or any of the John Does for further funds if the auction failed to recover all of the monies owed, including the interest accrued to date.  Secondly, presumably as a result this undertaking, the ASPR withdrew their answer (i.e. defence) to the initial Complaint lodged by the Plaintiff, meaning the judgement was uncontested.

In a judgement filed on 24 June, 2022, the Hon. Francis Kahn III ordered the building and lot to be sold at a public auction.  The Referee was ordered to pay the Plaintiff the amount due, a sum of $18,865,223.63 with, from 13 May, 2022 to the sale, the punitive per diem interest rate of 24% added.  This document confirms that the Plaintiff’s complaint against the ASPR, i.e. the non-payment of the consolidated mortgage principal of $11,750,00, had grown to over $18 million with interest.  The 2022 Form 990 shows the $11,750,000 mortgage was no longer on the balance sheet at the end of the year.

 

eCourt auction notice

A “Notice of sale” was filed with the New York County Clerk on 30 December 2022 by Thomas Kleinberger as the Referee, and Glenn Rodney, attorney for the Plaintiff.  It stated that the “approximate amount of judgment is $18,865,223.63 plus interest and costs.”  There was a last-ditch attempt to sell the property in January 2023, because it was put back on the market for $15 million, as reported in the New York Post (‘NYC townhouse and occult researchers’ headquarters lists for $15M’).  The offering expired on the date of the auction.  This was not the act of the Receiver, because a foreclosure lawsuit in New York only allows the court to auction the property to pay the debt, not to sell it, rather it was a desperate attempt by Sondow and Keane to avoid the auction, though it was unlikely to succeed given the timescale and would still have left the ASPR well short of the total owed (perhaps the hope was that with the publicity generated by the New York Post article there would be a bidding war to increase the sale price).  The effort failed anyway, and the foreclosure auction went ahead as scheduled.

The auction took place on 1 February, 2023, with an outcome of “Sold”.  Interestingly, a “Receiver’s Deed” wasn’t signed and recorded in the official property records until June 2024; it is not known why the parties waited sixteen months before creating the new mortgage documents with the buyer and recording the deed.  A “Foreclosure Action Surplus Monies Form” was filed with the court on 8 January, 2025 and shows that there was no surplus money from the 2023 auction turned over to the ASPR.  It had been signed on 20 June, 2024 by the representative for 73 Servicing, LLC.  The considerable length of time between the sale date and making the information public is again puzzling: the form itself states: “To be completed for every sale by court appointed Referee and filed with County Clerk and the Supreme Court Calendar Clerk within 30 days of sale.”

 

eCourt document list

Under new Ownership

In June 2024, the website traded announced the sale of the building to Walter Baker (‘Walter Baker Acquires Specialty Building From American Society For Psychical Research For $11.75M’).  This was much lower than it had been on the market for previously, and less than the ASPR’s liabilities.  The summary continues: “Walter Baker, represented by 5w73rd LLC, acquired the specialty building in a foreclosure sale from the American Society for Psychical Research, marking a significant transaction in the market.”  Devastating more accurately sums up this sale for those engaged in psychical research.  The PropertyShark website, containing information about the building, includes the question “When was 5 West 73rd Street, New York, NY 10023 last sold and what was the last sale price?”, to which the answer is: “5 West 73rd Street, New York, NY 10023 was last sold in [sic] 06/25/2024 for $100” (‘5 West 73rd Street, New York, NY 10023 Property Information’).  The payment of this nominal amount served to seal the deal.

Baker has a LinkedIn profile in which he describes himself thus: “I’m a Real Estate Buyer Agent with years of experience as a seasoned buyer liaison to the art and design, luxury industry.  I have a passion for interiors, design and furnishings.  I consider it an honor to be searching, viewing and acting on behalf of my clients as we go through the buying process together.”  According to his LinkedIn profile he has been employed as a real estate buyer agent for LG Fairmont since 2017, but he is not listed on their website, so is presumably now working on his own.  To clarify the situation, on 20 December 2024 Ruffles reached out (to use the popular expression) to LG Fairmont asking to be put in touch with Mr Baker.  They did not reply.

The new owner of the former ASPR headquarters building and lot, as listed on the New York City Department of Finance website (the Parcel Identifier is Manhattan, Block 1126, Lot 127), is 5w73rd LLC.  Presumably Baker, through 5w73rd LLC, which, as it shares its name with the old ASPR building’s address would have been set up to acquire the property, is either going to develop it and sell it on, or is acting as a representative for an unknown buyer who wishes to remain anonymous.  One wonders if the new owner and any others involved in the purchase realise how controversial the acquisition is.

The image of the New York building only disappeared from the ASPR website some time after mid-January 2025, a delay a cynic might have considered a case of false representation.  The address given on the website for individuals who wish to join by post, or make a donation, is now 459 Columbus Avenue #714, New York, NY 10024, which was the first obvious alteration to the website for a long time.  This is a rented mailbox at Manhattan Express Shipping, on the west side near Central Park, evidence the ASPR no longer has a physical office, just a virtual one.  At the time of writing, the ASPR website’s “Join the Society” page still carries a range of membership levels, from $70 for associates to $50,000 plus for benefactors.  Associates, it says, “receive discounts to talks, conferences, and special events, and may use the library by appointment.”  If the organisation is still soliciting membership fees but not providing the advertised benefits or explaining why they are unavailable, that must be considered fraud.

To try to clarify the situation, Ruffles made a number of requests for information to the ASPR.  On 14 December 2024 he sent the following to the general ASPR email address on its website (aspr@aspr.com): “I note that your New York headquarters has now been sold.  Will you be making a statement about the financial aspects of this transaction, and tell those interested (of which I am one) about the current whereabouts of the organisation’s library and archive?  What plans do you have to continue the ASPR?”

A more detailed set of questions was sent on 10 January 2025 to secretary Elizabeth Maldonado covering a number of issues, notably the building sale, the mortgages and the archive, concluding: “In sum, do the current trustees intend to restore the Society to a full membership organisation which fulfills the objectives for which it was founded?  If that is not the trustees’ vision, can you tell me what it is?”  The following day similar emails were sent to the email addresses of Nancy Sondow and Patrice Keane, as found on official documents.  None responded.

 

ASPR on YouTube!

Somewhat to our surprise, on the last day of 2024 a YouTube channel, “ASPR Inc.,” uploaded three videos.  The channel was set up by the ASPR (there is a link to it on the ASPR website) on 16 February 2024, but had hitherto been inactive.  The first video is a clip taken from Powers of the Mind, the first programme in a three-part 1992 BBC documentary In Search of the Dead, which features Sondow.  The other two are talks given by her which are copyrighted 2017 and 2018 by the ASPR.  Comments have been turned off on all three videos.  The “About” section contains the sentence “Through its lectures, archives and information services the ASPR addresses important questions,” and refers to its “mission”, as if these activities are ongoing.  The obvious question why for all practical purposes a defunct organisation would go to the trouble of uploading videos could be to give the impression it is still active, even though there is little effort involved in putting old videos on YouTube.  At the time of writing, the number of subscribers has just reached double figures.  There is also a Facebook page in the name of the ASPR, with 137 followers at the time of writing, which is merely a placeholder with no content.

 

What now?

For the moment it looks like the ASPR has been saved from total collapse, but whether it can be restored as a viable concern that will once more make important contributions to psychical research is another matter.  Currently using a rented mailbox, it is difficult to see how it can operate without a proper office, despite Keane still claiming to work an average 60 hour week according to the 2023 Form 990.  No public communications have been made by the president, executive director or the trustees.  The ASPR currently has no active social media accounts.

There are two separate issues to consider, now that the nonprofit’s headquarters building has been sold.  Firstly, can any illegal actions be laid at the door of ASPR officers, with guilty parties brought to account?  Related to this point, if any money has been extracted illicitly from the Society can it be recovered, and, if it is, how can it be safeguarded and used for the purpose for which the organisation was founded?

Secondly, the whereabouts of the archive and library should be established, its integrity as a collection respected, and if the ASPR is unable to manage it, a suitable home found so that once again it is made available to researchers.  Eyes are watching to see if items turn up for sale on the open market in case there is an attempt to dispose of its contents.  A further worry is the possibility that if rental fees go unpaid for a commercial storage space the contents may be auctioned off to the highest bidder.  This situation should be a concern of anyone who has a regard for the subject.

If it proves impossible to resurrect the ASPR as more than an entity which only exists on paper and a website, and its leaders are found wanting, observers have suggested that any funds might be transferred to another organisation in the same field, such as the Parapsychology Foundation (PF), similarly a New York-based non-profit.  The PF provides an excellent example of an organisation which sought to ensure the survival of its heritage, rather than see it as a disposable asset.  Encountering severe financial pressures and a lack of external funding, the Foundation faced the breakup of its historically important Garrett Research Library.

Rather than sell it, however, the PF made the ethical decision to donate it to the Special collections of the Albin O. Kuhn Library of the University of Maryland Baltimore County.  Announcing the donation, PF president Lisette Coly stated that “Leaving such a carefully crafted resource for future students of the paranormal was of overall greater import than the life of a non-profit organization.” (‘Heartbroken’).  The PF’s board of trustees stand in contrast to those individuals who have charge of the ASPR.

Nancy Sondow and Patrice Keane have had an iron grip on the ASPR for over thirty years:  Keane has been executive director since 1992, Sondow has been president since 1993.  Now is clearly the time for change.  If they truly have its interests at heart, they and the trustees will make a public statement outlining the current situation, their plans for the future (including the acquisition of new premises), the reinstatement of a membership base as outlined on the website, and setting out a timetable for democratic elections to the positions of trustees.  It is only with a fresh start that the ASPR will once again become a significant force in psychical research, but anyone contemplating joining, or rejoining, will want to have confidence that its leaders have members’ interests at heart, and not their own.  Failing these actions, it should seek to merge with another existing nonprofit organisation.

Those wishing to express their dissatisfaction with the present state of affairs can contact the New York Charities Bureau at charities.bureau@ag.ny.gov.  The Change.org petition still has some way to go to reach its target of 1,000 signatures, so anyone who has yet to sign it is urged to do so.  If anyone has had any kind of communication from the ASPR recently, or has further information about the situation, please feel free to email tom.ruffles@yahoo.co.uk.  Finally, it would be heartening if those active in the field and in the news media stopped sitting on their hands and helped to bring this scandal to the public’s attention.

 

Note: Those wishing to examine the 990 and CR500 financial filings, property records, and foreclosure court records for themselves may do so here (forensic accountants particularly welcome):

New York State Office of the Attorney General: https://www.charitiesnys.com/RegistrySearch/show_details.jsp?id={10CB3494-0000-C014-BC12-3FDE9A9F4923}

Propublica: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/131655205

New York City property records (Borough of Manhattan, Block 1126, Lot 127): https://a836-acris.nyc.gov/CP/

WebCivil Supreme, the New York State eCourts database (Case Index No. 850211/2020): https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASMain

 

The information in this article was sourced from public records and other publicly available sources and is believed to be accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge and belief. 

The ASPR, along with its current president Nancy Sondow, executive director Patrice Keane, and secretary/co-treasurer Elizabeth Maldonado, were contacted by email individually and given the opportunity to respond to questions.  No reply has been received from any of them after more than a month of waiting.  We will update this post in the event one is received.

 

References

‘5 West 73rd Street, New York, NY 10023 Property Information’, PropertyShark, https://www.propertyshark.com/mason/Property/17384/5-W-73-St-New-York-NY-10023/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

American Society for Psychical Research website, http://www.aspr.com/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

‘American Society for Psychical Research’, The Psi Encyclopedia, created 10 September 2019, https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/american-society-psychical-research (accessed 12 February 2025).

Andrews, Travis M., ‘This horror writer’s most outlandish character is himself’, The Washington Post, 12 January 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2025/01/12/grady-hendrix-witchcraft-wayward-girls/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

Cohen, Michelle, ‘$18M Beaux-Arts mansion is an Upper West Side architectural icon with Dakota views’, 6sqft, 12 July 2019, https://www.6sqft.com/18m-beaux-arts-mansion-is-an-upper-west-side-architectural-icon-with-dakota-views/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

Coly, Lisette, ‘Heartbroken’, Parapsychology Foundation, Inc., 18 September 2023, https://parapsychology.org/heartbroken/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

‘Educational Corporation Law and Legal Definition’, USLegal, https://definitions.uslegal.com/e/educational-corporation/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

Frishberg, Hannah, ‘NYC townhouse and occult researchers’ headquarters lists for $15M’, New York Post, 17 January 2023, https://nypost.com/2023/01/17/nyc-home-and-occult-researchers-headquarters-lists-for-15m/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

GeoHaunts, ‘American Society for Psychical Research - What Happened?’ Part 1, TikTok, 16 August 2021, https://www.tiktok.com/@geohaunts/video/6997162251295657221?lang=en (accessed 12 February 2025).

GeoHaunts, ‘American Society for Psychical Research’ Part 2, TikTok, 29 August 2021, https://www.tiktok.com/@geohaunts/video/7001672903993462021?lang=en (accessed 12 February 2025).

Hardaway, Liz, ‘The Psychics of Chelsea’, Our Town, 17 October 2017, https://www.otdowntown.com/news/local-news/the-psychics-of-chelsea-EDNP1220171017171019941 (accessed 12 February 2025).

‘Goodsort, T. C.’, ‘Save the American Society for Psychical Research!’, Change.org, 5 November 2019, https://www.change.org/p/new-york-charities-bureau-save-the-american-society-for-psychical-research (accessed 12 February 2025).

Hansen, George P., ‘A Salary in Parapsychology: Patrice Keane (ASPR)’, 13 August 2007, http://paranormaltrickster.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/salary-in-parapsychology-patrice-keane.html (accessed 12 February 2025).

Hansen, George P., ‘Panel – Psience: What New Developments in Scientific Investigation Promote Understanding of Psi?’ Academy of Spirituality and Paranormal Studies, Inc, Annual Conference Proceedings, 2012.

Horn, Stacy, ‘What is the deal with the ASPR?’, 20 November 2011, http://www.echonyc.com/~horn/unbelievable/?p=2412 (accessed 12 February 2025).

Krasnow, Iris, ‘No laughing matter’, UPI, 28 May 1984, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/05/28/NO-LAUGHING-MATTER/6806454564800/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

Miller, Tom, ‘The 1903 Strasburger House - No. 5 West 73rd Street’, 12 January 2013, https://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-1903-strasburger-house-no-5-west.html (accessed 12 February 2025).

New York State Attorney General (Letitia James), ‘Frequently Asked Questions for Charities, Non-Profits & Fundraisers’, https://ag.ny.gov/resources/organizations/charities-non-profits-fundraisers/charities-non-profits-fundraisers-faqs (accessed 12 February 2025).

Pandolfi, Elizabeth, ‘Grady Hendrix is a comic writer with a thing for horror’, Charleston City Paper, 19 November 2014, https://charlestoncitypaper.com/2014/11/19/grady-hendrix-is-a-comic-writer-with-a-thing-for-horror/ (accessed 12 February 2025).

Playfair, Guy Lyon, ‘An American Institution in Low Spirits’, Fortean Times, Issue 320, November 2014, pp. 52-3.

‘PPP Loan Data — American Society For Psychical Research, New York, NY’, FederalPay.org, https://www.federalpay.org/paycheck-protection-program/american-society-for-psychical-research-new-york-ny (accessed 12 February 2025).

Ruffles, Tom, ‘More Downs than Ups at the American Society for Psychical Research’, 18 July 2019, https://tomruffles.blogspot.com/2019/07/more-downs-than-ups-at-american-society.html.

Ruffles, Tom, review of McConnell, Robert, Far Out in the New Age: The Subversion of Science by Cultural Communism, a Compendium of Current Social Controversy (self-published, 1995), 11 November 2019, https://tomruffles.wordpress.com/2019/11/11/far-out-in-the-new-age-by-robert-mcconnell/.

Ruffles, Tom, ‘The American Society for Psychical Research: Recent Developments’, 20 February 2020, https://tomruffles.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-american-society-for-psychical.html.

Ruffles, Tom, ‘The American Society for Psychical Research: Action Required’, 3 April 2020, https://tomruffles.blogspot.com/2020/04/the-american-society-for-psychical.html.

‘Section 716: Loans to directors, officers and key persons’, The New York State Senate, https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/NPC/716 (accessed 12 February 2025).

Schiesel, Seth, ‘New Video Game? Who You Gonna Call?’, New York Times, 28 May 2009, https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/arts/31schi.html (accessed 12 February 2025).

‘Walter Baker Acquires Specialty Building From American Society For Psychical Research For $11.75M’, traded, https://traded.co/deals/new-york/special-purpose/sale/5-west-73rd-street/ (accessed 12 February 2025).